Toward a Psychology of Memory Accuracy

Koriat, Asher; Goldsmith, Morris; Pansky, Ainat

doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.481

Cited by 457 publications

(333 citation statements)

References 280 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

310

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…More generally, rats with hippocampal lesions are impaired in finding a hidden platform but perform as well as sham controls if the platform location is visibly marked (Morris et al 1982). Consistent with this idea, the probe-test occupancy plot of visible platform-trained rats clearly demonstrated that there is little more than a general sense (e.g., "gist"; Koriat et al 2000) as to exact platform location. In contrast, the results from the hidden platform-trained rats suggest the formation of a strong spatial representation for the exact spatial coordinates of the hidden platform (see Fig.…”

mentioning

confidence: 60%

Remodeling of hippocampal mossy fibers is selectively induced seven days after the acquisition of a spatial but not a cued reference memory task

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relating storage of specific information to a particular neuromorphological change is difficult because behavioral performance factors are not readily disambiguated from underlying cognitive processes. This issue is addressed here by demonstrating robust reorganization of the hippocampal mossy fiber terminal field (MFTF) when adult rats learn the location of a hidden platform but not when rats learn to locate a visible platform. Because the latter task requires essentially the same behavioral performance as the former, the observed MFTF growth is seen as the consequence of specific input-dependent hippocampal activity patterns selectively generated by processing of extramaze but not intramaze cues. Successful performance on the hidden platform task requires formation of spatial memory. Increased MFTFs in hidden platform-trained rats are observed 7 d but not 2 d after training nor in swim controls. These results suggest that structural plasticity of the mossy fiber:CA3 circuit may contribute to the maintenance of long-lasting memory but not to the initial storage of the spatial context. Does gross remodeling of anatomical circuits contribute to longterm memory storage? It has long been thought that the act of learning redefines the physical structure of neural connections (e.g., Ramon y Cajal 1905); however, there are few experimental demonstrations of such rearrangements.Recently our group has provided direct evidence of learningdependent structural plasticity by demonstrating that training rats from two different strains (Holahan et al. 2006(Holahan et al. , 2007 to locate a hidden platform in a water maze induces growth of hippocampal granule cell mossy fiber terminal fields (MFTFs) from the stratum lucidum (SL) of CA3 into the stratum oriens (SO) and stratum pyramidale (SP). No growth was observed in swim controls that spent an equivalent period of time in the water maze as trained animals but with no platform present. When mice were trained in the same task no such growth was observed (Rekart et al. 2007).The presence of hippocampal MFTF growth after spatial training in rats is convergent with data from lesion studies in rats (Morris et al. 1982;Sutherland et al. 1983;Moser et al. 1993Moser et al. , 1995 and mice (Logue et al. 1997), which suggests that spatial learning tasks, such as locating a hidden platform, are mediated by the hippocampus (O'Keefe and Nadel 1978;Eichenbaum 2000). Thus, it seems likely that growth of the mossy fibers consequent to spatial learning is driven by spatial learningdependent hippocampal activity.One outstanding issue, however, is whether the learningdependent growth is truly specific for spatial (i.e., hippocampaldependent) learning, an issue raised in the original observations of Ramirez-Amaya et al. (1999. Although no growth was observed in swim control animals that were exposed to an equal amount of time in the pool as hidden platform-trained rats, swim controls, in contrast to trained animals, had no control over the amount of time spent in the pool. Indeed, the most reinf...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 60%

Remodeling of hippocampal mossy fibers is selectively induced seven days after the acquisition of a spatial but not a cued reference memory task

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Valence and the Development of Immediate and Long-Term False Memory Illusions Our memory is a reconstructive process in which errors often occur (for an overview see Koriat, Goldsmith, & Pansky, 2000). That means that we might falsely remember details that we in fact did not encounter.…”

Section: Permanent Repository Linkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Valence and the development of immediate and long-term false memory illusions

Howe

Candel

Otgaar

et al. 2010

Memory

126

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. and children's (Experiment 2) true recall and recognition was better for neutral than negative items and although false recall was also higher for neutral items, false recognition was higher for negative items. The last three experiments examined adults' (Experiment 3) and children's (Experiments 4 and 5) one-week long-term recognition of neutral and negative-emotional information. The results replicated the immediate recall and recognition findings from the first two experiments. More important, these experiments showed that although true recognition decreased over the one-week interval, false recognition of neutral items remained unchanged whereas false recognition of negative-emotional items increased. These findings are discussed in terms of theories of emotion and memory as well as their forensic implications. Permanent repository linkKeywords: Valence and memory; False memory development; DRM paradigmValence and the Development of Immediate and Long-Term False Memory Illusions Our memory is a reconstructive process in which errors often occur (for an overview see Koriat, Goldsmith, & Pansky, 2000). That means that we might falsely remember details that we in fact did not encounter. In recent years, the development of false memories has been extensively studied with the Deese/Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm (Deese, 1959;Roediger & McDermott, 1995). Using this paradigm, participants are presented with word lists that consist of close semantic associates of a non-presented critical lure. For example, a list might consist of the words door, glass, pane, shade, ledge, sill, house, open, curtain, frame, view, breeze, sash, screen, and shutter which are all related to the non-presented word window. Studies have shown that participants have the tendency to falsely recall and recognize the critical lures during subsequent memory tests (for an overview see Gallo, 2006). Another robust finding obtained with the DRM paradigm is a reverse age effect. Specifically, studies have shown that the development of spontaneous false memories increases as a function of age (e.g., Brainerd, Reyna, & Brandse, 1995;Howe, 2005Howe, , 2006Howe, , 2008Sugrue & Hayne, 2006). The low levels of spontaneous false memories found in young children may be due to a failure to automatically access associative relations between list items and the critical lure (associative-activation theory, or AAT, e.g., Howe, 2005Howe, , 2008Howe, Gagnon, & Thouas, 2008;Howe, Wimmer, & Blease, 2009a;Howe, Wimmer, Gagnon, & Plumpton, 2009b) or to extract gist memories across words on DRM lists (fuzzy-trace theory, or FTT, e.g., Brainerd & Reyna, 2005).Despite the robust findings produced by the DRM paradigm, researchers have questioned the ecological validity of this paradigm (Freyd & Gleaves, 1996). One concern raised by Freyd and Gleaves is that in real world scenarios false memories often involve emotional events. To address this concer...

show abstract

“…Memory records are not discrete, stable items but rather are malleable (susceptible to transformation and recombination) during encoding, the consolidation process that precedes stable storage, and again during the reconsolidation process that follow reactivation (retrieval); nor are records retrieved unchanged, since retrieval is a reconstructive process (Dudai, 2004(Dudai, , 2006Hassabis & Maguire, 2007Koriat, Goldsmith, & Pansky, 2000;Loftus, 2005;Matthen, 2010;McClelland, 1995McClelland, , 2011Schacter & Addis, 2007;Schacter, Norman, & Koutstaal, 1998;Shanton, 2011;Sutton, 2003;Vosgerau, 2010).…”

Section: Problems For Clark and Chalmers' Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Is external memory memory? Biological memory and extended mind

Michaelian

2012

Consciousness and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c t Clark and Chalmers (1998) claim that an external resource satisfying the following criteria counts as a memory: (1) the agent has constant access to the resource; (2) the information in the resource is directly available; (3) retrieved information is automatically endorsed; (4) information is stored as a consequence of past endorsement. Research on forgetting and metamemory shows that most of these criteria are not satisfied by biological memory, so they are inadequate. More psychologically realistic criteria generate a similar classification of standard putative external memories, but the criteria still do not capture the function of memory. An adequate account of memory function, compatible with its evolution and its roles in prospection and imagination, suggests that external memory performs a function not performed by biological memory systems. External memory is thus not memory. This has implications for: extended mind theorizing, ecological validity of memory research, the causal theory of memory.

show abstract

Toward a Psychology of Memory Accuracy

Cited by 457 publications

References 280 publications

Remodeling of hippocampal mossy fibers is selectively induced seven days after the acquisition of a spatial but not a cued reference memory task

Remodeling of hippocampal mossy fibers is selectively induced seven days after the acquisition of a spatial but not a cued reference memory task

Valence and the development of immediate and long-term false memory illusions

Is external memory memory? Biological memory and extended mind

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About